Democrats Sell Souls on Drilling

I would humbly like to remind the Democrats that the definition of pragmatism is:

pragmatism

a philosophical system stressing practical consequences and values as standards by which the validity of concepts are to be determined. — pragmatist, n., adj. — pragmatistic, adj.

Therefore, its not pragmatic to start caving on legislation just as ineffectual now as it would have been 30 years ago, just because people are screaming for energy solutions to stop the incessant bleed of their free dollars into the pump and the power bill. The practical consequences of drilling offshore are still buptkiss. They do have another word for the political move the Senate Democrats are currently exhibiting – poor leadership.

poor leadership

a reoccurring political philosophy adopted by the American Democratic Party often characterized by weak-kneed flip-floppery.- flip-flopper n. - kowtowing v.

The definition for poor leadership is my own. What the Democrats refuse to learn, in the case of offshore drilling specifically but as accorded to their leadership generally, that those gosh-darned silly Americans still put some faith in their leadership, so when their leadership proposes an idea that looks like it will help them, they more or less go for it. If you told them more drilling would help the gas prices, they’d open up their living room floor to exploration.

What the Democrats have been weak to do is come forth with a concrete alternative to offshore drilling, instead they have a myriad of combined solutions, but no Kennedy-moon goals. More drillings = more oil is easy enough to understand; even if what the American people don’t understand is that the more oil won’t equal enough dollars saved to wipe your butt with. The default Democratic message has been, “We need to implement a number of solutions to get ourselves to a better energy efficiency by the year 2025(15, 30, 50, 40).”

Let’s recap.

Democratic message:

Implement armies of blithering technocrats to implement varied solutions simultaneously leading to a greener, cheaper energy more than a decade into the future

Republican Message:

More Drilling = More Oil

Seriously, which is more convincing to you? So is anyone surprised most Americans support offshore drilling? If the Democrats had crystallized their message long ago they wouldn’t be forced to choose between the right decision and the popular one.

So, the Democrats must now pick between what is politically pragmatic (as opposed to real pragmatism), aka the the politically expedient solution, versus what is best for the country. While the Democrats may have been put into a hard place I plead to them not to flip-flop. While a vote against the politically unpopular will look bad, the opportunity to prove yourself right against the Republicans in the future will be valuable. Otherwise, it will hang around your necks like the Iraq vote has during the last two presidential elections (cough, cough, Kerry, cough Clinton).

A vote for it, not even a scant month after you vehemently opposed it, will be flip-flopping, and from that there is no recovery. So, Senate Democratic leadership, I remind you of your own recent statements, likely to come out in the media storm ahead.

From Harry Reid on June 18th, in response to Bush’s call for an end to the drilling ban:

“This week’s flip-flop on offshore oil drilling by President Bush and Senator John McCain is nothing more than a cynical campaign ploy that will do nothing to lower energy prices, and represents another big giveaway to oil companies already making billions in profits.”

What he’s saying now:

“I’m not knee-jerk opposed to anything,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). “We’re willing to work. We haven’t shut our minds to anything.”

Shame, shame Senate Majority Leader. Clair McCaskill what had you said about McCain’s call for an end to the ban on the same day?

Democratic Missouri Senator Claire McCaskill said McCain was “shilling for Saudi Arabia” with his campaign proposals on energy policy, “If he were being scored, he would get a 10 for the execution of his flip-flop. He’s folded under the pressure of Big Oil.”

Is she beginning to tee-toll if Big Oil begins to make other promises?

“If they were showing in good faith that they were drilling on some of the 68 million acres they have now, it might change some of our attitudes,” said Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.).

Fine leadership from the Show-Me State. Can I also mention she voted against a bill amendment to open up natural gas drilling off Virginia’s coast in March? But certainly majority whip Dick Durbin, the senior Senator from Obama’s state, who opposes offshore drilling, will have the sense to stand tall? He certainly lined up behind Obama on June 18th, here are both their remarks:

Obama quickly rejected that idea.

“There’s no way that allowing offshore drilling would lower gas prices right now. At best you’re looking at five years, or more, down the road,” he said.

And Democratic leaders in Congress agreed.

“We can’t drill our way out of this,” said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Illinois.

Where does the dastardly Dick stand now?

Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) said that he was open to drilling in new areas but opposed to “offshore drilling if there is any environmental impact.” Durbin reiterated the call for oil companies to drill in areas covered by existing leases first, but then added: “Beyond that, if there is a suggestion of some new area to go into, I’ll look at it.”

Ohhhh, how the mighty flop! Or prepare themselves to anyways.

-Marc-